In article , Hilo Black
writes


"bert" wrote in message
...
In article , Hilo Black
writes


"bert" wrote in message
...
In article , Hilo Black
writes


"bert" wrote in message
...
In article , Hilo Black
writes


"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 07/02/16 18:01, Hilo Black wrote:


"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 07/02/16 11:24, Dex wrote:
On 06/02/2016 23:17, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 06/02/16 22:23, Hilo Black wrote:
They do sometimes get it right tho like they did
when they gave Churchill the bums rush at the
ballot box very unceremoniously indeed just after
the war had ended.

..and the nation was nearly bankrupted and took ten years to
from Labour..


Because of paying the loans we had during the war and the
rebuilding of
the country after perchance?

well rather the labour government ignoring the above and
handing out
cash....

BULL****.

Did Maggie eat your hamster wodders?

Unlikely given that I think most of what she did
was the right thing to do. It was only really the
final poll tax that didnt make any real sense.

It made quite a lot of sense,

No it did not. A house with say 4 adults living
in it doesnt cost the govt more 4 times as
much to provide services to and to defend
etc than a house with just 1 adult in it.

If you look at what local councils spend very little is property
related.

That's bull**** with the roads and local infrastructure.

Doesn't your council send you details of their budgets every year?
Suggest you read it next time.

Dont need to, I know what they spend their money on.

The majority is people related - social services, education

But that doesnt mostly get spent on those you can
collect the poll tax from, its from the others who dont
get anything in that regard from the local council.

True of most taxes.

Most taxes get spent on what most
of us use government services wise.

Which in the case of local government is mostly social services and
education.
except the bit that refused to recognise the need to take some
account of ability to pay.

And that is the other massive problem with it.

And the other is that it makes no sense for those
entirely on benefits to be paying it because its
just shovelling some of the amount they are
getting out the door, into their pockets and
then straight back to the same operation that
paid it in the first place. Mindlessly silly.

Which bit of "ability to pay" did you not understand?

There are plenty of others who aren't on benefits
that dont have the ability to pay the poll tax.
There are equally many others who can't really afford to pay the
current council tax - but they have to. There are many others who can
afford to but don't pay any council tax at all.

Irrelevant to that question of yours.

A poll tax doesnt even get more paying for what
they get from the council, in fact tho who live alone
end up paying much less than they would without
a poll tax and those with multiple adults in the
household end up paying a lot more.
Which makes it a lot fairer given that most local government spending is
not property related.
--
bert